The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1887-05-07
RECOGNIZING THE POINTS. i"

We have already given brief report
of the discussion at Harveyville, Kan,
between Rev. L. w. Woodrow (Univers.
alisD and Rev. P. w. Shick (Disciple).
There now comes to hand copy of the
Kansas State Register, of April ID, with
another account of the debate and very
notable addenda in the shape OF COM
munication addressed to the moderators
and congregation by Mr.. John Small,
Methodist, Of Harveyville, in reference to
certain points made by Mr.. Woodrow
in that and former discussions at Har-
veyville, which were entirely overlooked
by the orthodox gentlemen who were
Mr.. Woodrow's opponents in these dis.
cussions. Mr.. Snail is gentleman
of intelligence and reader; he is also
clear-headed enough to recognize the
strong points male by the Universal
list disputant, which were not an
wered on this or the former occasions.
What these "ponts" are viii be seen
from his communication, which we give
below. We can imagine the surprise of
Mr.. Small that these "points" were not
answered even after they were renewedly
brought to the attention of the gentlemen
most interested. It did not then, per-
haps, occur to him that the neglect to an
swer was the offspring of that "discre-
ton" which is said to be " the better
part of valor." II will now undoubtedly
| be recognized that such was the case; and
that if either Of the gentlemen could have
answered the "points,'' it would have
come out in the discussion. That they
did not attempt to answer is evidence to
| Mr.. Small that Mr.. Woodrow and Uni
versalism are largely the gamers in the
several debates. All candid readers will
agree in this conclusion. The said
points " are not new in discussions be-
tween Universalsts and the orthodox;
but it is not often that one of the contra
ry part, with no particular prepossessions
in favor of Universalism, recognizes SO
clearly the failure to meet the arguments
based upon them, and is candid enough
to confess to the failure in the premises
Mr.. SmaiPs communication is as follows:
GENTLEMEN MoDERAroBs, LADIES AND
GENTLEMEN:-It has been my privilege to
attend four debates in this place, on these
same propositions, Br. Woodrow being one
of the disputants. In all of these debates he
has stated certain things which he claims to
be facts, which have never been met or de-
MED by any of his opponents. 1 am nothing
but common farmer, and do not know
whether they are facts or not, but these men
that have met him in debate ought to know
| whether they are facts or not, but they
have not told US whether they are or not; in
other words, they never met them. When
Br. Grissom debated these propositions with
Br. Woodrow, | called his attention to these
statements and requested him to meet them,
but he passed them over in silence. Next
came the debate with Rev. Mr.. Milligan.
Several times called his attention to these
alleged facts, and urged upon him to meet
them, for l confess was much amazed when
they were first presented, and at first sup
posed they were not true, but seeing they
|
continue to question the facts. 1 finally wrote
these so-called facts on paper, and gave them
to Mr.. Milligan and said to him, meet these
facts, the audience demands it. But he, too,
passed them over without mention. And
finally this debate came which has just closed,
and was anxious to hear these allegations
met by Br. Shick, but, as BEFORE they have
not been even mentioned by Br. Shick. Now
to the point-what are those alleged facts?
Br. Woodrow said that for 1000 years the
old Hebrew language and the Old Testament
had no word that stood for endless punish
ment or an endless hell, and that the Jews
just before the time of Christ, had derived
the idea from the pagans and bad to borrow
from them the words that represented the
idea. Br. Woodrow went on to say that
neither Jesus nor his apostles ever taught the
doctrine of endless punishment nor an end
less hell, for they never used those words that
represented the idea. He also said that for
the first centuries of the Christian church, the
doctrine of universal salvation was orthodox,
and was not condemned or anathametized as
heretical till the year 5i4 A. D., and for all
this time the doctrine was received in the
early Christian church without question, and
was openly advocated by what are called the
apostolic fathers. Now ladies and gentle
men, IT these things are true they involve tre-
mendous consequences, and you, Br. Shick,
ought to have met these facts, but you did
not do it. These are the facts that have not
been met, at least Br. Woodrow presents
them as facts and makes his argument upon
them. And if they are not true they ought
to have been exposed. We are not supposed
to know whether they are true or not, but
these men that have been debating with him
are supposed to know, and not having denied
them, nothing is left for US to do but to ac-
cept them. If Mr. Woodrow has been hood
winking this people, he ought to have been
exposed, but no man has dared to contradict
his statements.
THE PASTORS INSTITUTE.